Perhaps the issue of girls’ education is one of the most central issues of
Pakistan which is not discussed quite often. It is taken for granted that by
establishing more schools more girls will be educated. This is true to a greater
extent but what would one say when the already established girls schools are
blown up or there is very little enrollment or there are too many early dropouts
from these schools? The issue is not so simple and needs to be discussed at full
length.
It would be wiser to enlist and elaborate upon the reasons or to be more specific the primary reasons why people are not sending their girls to schools. These reasons will somehow form a baseline study for possible interventions. While enlisting the reasons it should be kept in mind that in our part of the world simplicity is what makes workable ideas for successful interventions. Rather than beating about the bush with the so-called scholarly style of sociological, psychological, political, economic and such other perspectives a simpler and straightforward approach might be adopted which would possibly serve more practical purposes. And the last thing to keep in mind while making the list is the golden rule that there is no golden rule-order doesn’t matter.
In my view the first reason to be discussed is poverty. We are poor people. Poverty is a curse and the mother of all problems. If I am poor, I would say I can’t send my son to school let alone educating my daughter! This is the most genuine reason one can offer. Do we have any direct reply to this reason? No, we listen to it and move ahead and start debating other reasons because we have no immediate solution in mind for problem of such gigantic nature as poverty. Alas! We could have stopped and thought over it for a while what could we do about poverty and thus could make an increase in girls’ enrollment in schools. So, the argument becomes circular as we have no solution to offer and we tend to ignore that poverty is the primary risk for girls’ education. Such ignorance is already resulted as major hurdle for long term policy making and sustained interventions for girls’ education in our country.
The second reason is honour. Unfortunately, our too much obsession with honour as we tend to make female stereotypes deprives us of the utility of girls’ education. But honour is the least discussed reason which restricts girls’ access to education. I may be wrong, but if you don’t see any girl in the market or in the street, immediately give the impression that girls in these areas don’t go to schools. A society where women must not walk out of their homes-as is the perception-such society does not allow girls education. Please forgive me for any oversimplification but I think honour is one of the primary reasons due to which people do not send their girls to schools. They think that sending girls to schools will bring shame or disgrace for the family; hence, girls should better stay at home for avoiding the risk of any family disgrace.
Thirdly, a popular perception is that girls ought to marry as soon as possible to ease the burden on the parents. This is equally true for both early marriages as well as late marriages but in any case, a girl is supposed to marry and leave the home. What is the need of investing on an outsider who will not contribute to the family status? True, trends are changing, take for example the changing perceptions in our society that educated girls are contributing to family income and status, they find better husbands and they have increased independence. But I am deliberately avoiding such trends because I am discussing the reasons why the people do not educate their girls and exaggerating such trends would result in too much complacency or optimism. The picture of girls’ education is horribly pessimistic.
Fourthly girls stay at home to do household work. If they go to schools, suppose a mother, who is usually ill, may perhaps die of overwork. So girls are unpaid servants who are supposed to do all the household labour-child labour in most cases-and thus they work from dawn to dusk in the so-called pretext of training her for future life i.e. married life.
Fifth, a simple reason, that there is no girls’ school in the area so girls do not go to schools. This reason is also debatable as here in this context education of a girl is only linked with school. True, we don’t have other formal ways of educating girls but too much stress on this point lead us to the oversimplification of the problem that with more schools more girls will be educated. This also absolves us of the thinking that education or literacy means quality education and the ability to learn skills etc. Lack of child-friendly schooling might also be included as a reason or threat to girls’ education. However, in my opinion, this is not one of the primary reasons.
Sixth, there are some parts of the country mainly FATA and parts of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa where girls’ access to education is denied due to militancy. Taliban are against girls’ education and they have a clear signal for girls who go to schools i.e. girls are facing the consequences like what happened to Malala. The Taliban claimed to have attacked Malala Yousafzy for her struggle for girls’ education. Here, I want to thank Malala because so inspiring her struggle is that I am writing this piece.
The threat of militancy which is denying access of education to girls is not solely the problem of FATA or parts of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. God forbids, what would happen if the militants penetrate deeply to other parts of Pakistan-take for example the Punjabi Taliban. This is a very serious problem and needs much consideration for fear that its tentacles may likely to spread to other parts of Pakistan.
Reasons may be many or one, small or big, but what matters most is the starting point or the realization for possible interventions. It seems that our criminal negligence towards girls’ education has now taken us to this miserable stage.
This negligence is the product of traditional male chauvinism which is inherent in the feudal-tribal nexus. It would sound like a clichés that 50 percent of the female population is under risk and out of the mainstream life in a male-dominated society but in Pakistan this idea is worth repeating and worth pursuing as an ideal.
There is always opportunity for a new start and to take this new start why not take a bold side with Malala (and her father Zia ud Din Yousafzai), understand her symbolism and pursue her struggle? Malala as “symbol of resistance” can create long term impacts if we first consider Malala as “symbol of girls’ education.”
http://www.thefrontierpost.com/article/201528/
It would be wiser to enlist and elaborate upon the reasons or to be more specific the primary reasons why people are not sending their girls to schools. These reasons will somehow form a baseline study for possible interventions. While enlisting the reasons it should be kept in mind that in our part of the world simplicity is what makes workable ideas for successful interventions. Rather than beating about the bush with the so-called scholarly style of sociological, psychological, political, economic and such other perspectives a simpler and straightforward approach might be adopted which would possibly serve more practical purposes. And the last thing to keep in mind while making the list is the golden rule that there is no golden rule-order doesn’t matter.
In my view the first reason to be discussed is poverty. We are poor people. Poverty is a curse and the mother of all problems. If I am poor, I would say I can’t send my son to school let alone educating my daughter! This is the most genuine reason one can offer. Do we have any direct reply to this reason? No, we listen to it and move ahead and start debating other reasons because we have no immediate solution in mind for problem of such gigantic nature as poverty. Alas! We could have stopped and thought over it for a while what could we do about poverty and thus could make an increase in girls’ enrollment in schools. So, the argument becomes circular as we have no solution to offer and we tend to ignore that poverty is the primary risk for girls’ education. Such ignorance is already resulted as major hurdle for long term policy making and sustained interventions for girls’ education in our country.
The second reason is honour. Unfortunately, our too much obsession with honour as we tend to make female stereotypes deprives us of the utility of girls’ education. But honour is the least discussed reason which restricts girls’ access to education. I may be wrong, but if you don’t see any girl in the market or in the street, immediately give the impression that girls in these areas don’t go to schools. A society where women must not walk out of their homes-as is the perception-such society does not allow girls education. Please forgive me for any oversimplification but I think honour is one of the primary reasons due to which people do not send their girls to schools. They think that sending girls to schools will bring shame or disgrace for the family; hence, girls should better stay at home for avoiding the risk of any family disgrace.
Thirdly, a popular perception is that girls ought to marry as soon as possible to ease the burden on the parents. This is equally true for both early marriages as well as late marriages but in any case, a girl is supposed to marry and leave the home. What is the need of investing on an outsider who will not contribute to the family status? True, trends are changing, take for example the changing perceptions in our society that educated girls are contributing to family income and status, they find better husbands and they have increased independence. But I am deliberately avoiding such trends because I am discussing the reasons why the people do not educate their girls and exaggerating such trends would result in too much complacency or optimism. The picture of girls’ education is horribly pessimistic.
Fourthly girls stay at home to do household work. If they go to schools, suppose a mother, who is usually ill, may perhaps die of overwork. So girls are unpaid servants who are supposed to do all the household labour-child labour in most cases-and thus they work from dawn to dusk in the so-called pretext of training her for future life i.e. married life.
Fifth, a simple reason, that there is no girls’ school in the area so girls do not go to schools. This reason is also debatable as here in this context education of a girl is only linked with school. True, we don’t have other formal ways of educating girls but too much stress on this point lead us to the oversimplification of the problem that with more schools more girls will be educated. This also absolves us of the thinking that education or literacy means quality education and the ability to learn skills etc. Lack of child-friendly schooling might also be included as a reason or threat to girls’ education. However, in my opinion, this is not one of the primary reasons.
Sixth, there are some parts of the country mainly FATA and parts of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa where girls’ access to education is denied due to militancy. Taliban are against girls’ education and they have a clear signal for girls who go to schools i.e. girls are facing the consequences like what happened to Malala. The Taliban claimed to have attacked Malala Yousafzy for her struggle for girls’ education. Here, I want to thank Malala because so inspiring her struggle is that I am writing this piece.
The threat of militancy which is denying access of education to girls is not solely the problem of FATA or parts of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. God forbids, what would happen if the militants penetrate deeply to other parts of Pakistan-take for example the Punjabi Taliban. This is a very serious problem and needs much consideration for fear that its tentacles may likely to spread to other parts of Pakistan.
Reasons may be many or one, small or big, but what matters most is the starting point or the realization for possible interventions. It seems that our criminal negligence towards girls’ education has now taken us to this miserable stage.
This negligence is the product of traditional male chauvinism which is inherent in the feudal-tribal nexus. It would sound like a clichés that 50 percent of the female population is under risk and out of the mainstream life in a male-dominated society but in Pakistan this idea is worth repeating and worth pursuing as an ideal.
There is always opportunity for a new start and to take this new start why not take a bold side with Malala (and her father Zia ud Din Yousafzai), understand her symbolism and pursue her struggle? Malala as “symbol of resistance” can create long term impacts if we first consider Malala as “symbol of girls’ education.”
http://www.thefrontierpost.com/article/201528/
No comments:
Post a Comment